Auditor-General Affirms Clean Audit Finding Regarding Secretary to Parliament’s 70 Percent Salary Increase Despite Political Opposition

South Africa's Auditor-General finds no irregularity in Xolile George’s 70% salary hike, despite EFF and DA calls for a Public Protector probe.

By: AXL Media

Published: Mar 31, 2026, 5:57 AM EDT

AGSA Defends Scope of Audit Amid Political Scrutiny

The Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) has officially reaffirmed its audit findings for the 2023/24 financial year, dismissing claims of procedural irregularities in the management of Parliament's executive payroll. The clarification follows intense criticism from opposition parties regarding the significant salary hike awarded to Xolile George, the Secretary to Parliament. The AGSA emphasized that its investigation was strictly focused on whether the expenditure contravened the Financial Management of Parliament and Legislatures Act or established internal policies.

The R1.8 Million Discrepancy and Benchmarking Justification

At the center of the controversy is a dramatic shift in George’s remuneration package, which climbed from an initial R2.6 million to R4.4 million shortly after his appointment. Parliament’s executive authority justified the increase through a "benchmarking exercise" intended to align the Secretary's salary with comparable high-level public sector roles. While the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) have labeled the adjustment as irregular, the AGSA’s review concluded that the approval process fell within the delegated authority of Parliament’s leadership and complied with existing legal frameworks.

Opposition Parties Seek Further Investigations

The Democratic Alliance (DA) and the EFF have both escalated their opposition to the audit findings. The DA has formally petitioned the Public Protector to launch an independent investigation into the appointment process, while the EFF has submitted additional documentation to the AGSA that they believe was overlooked during the initial audit. The EFF’s leadership has not ruled out legal action to review the appointment, arguing that the 70 percent increase constitutes a misuse of public funds and a violation of the spirit of fiscal responsibility.